Two years later, the individual resigned from that company, not only because of the problem of "meeting the sea in the mountains", but also because of other complicated approval problems. In short, I feel that no matter how long I write, if I can't promote the implementation of the work and produce tangible benefits, then the work can be suspended. Otherwise, holding the idea of "it's useless to keep it, but it's a pity to abandon it" is undoubtedly a chicken rib, which wastes energy and time and is really unnecessary.
Whether it should be written or not needs specific analysis:
First of all, look at the nature of work. If you focus on mental work such as policy research, information consultation and writing, you can keep the working mode of one week a day, because it is conducive to exchanging needed goods between colleagues, and the superior can fully grasp the work progress of subordinates, and can play a role in supervising and promoting the work that needs to be implemented and supervised. For those who are mainly manual workers, such as machinery manufacturing and commodity sales, there is still no need to do this, at least there is no need for daily newspapers, because the nature of such work is the same as that of a day's work, and it is not necessary to spend that brain cell.
For example, the machinery manufacturing company where the individual is now located also has a daily newspaper "Daily", but there is no more written content. Instead, it is the real work progress and quality. In other words, numbers basically replace words, and everything needs numbers to speak. The result is that you don't need to use words deliberately, you only need one word and two words to feedback the quality situation, which greatly improves the work efficiency.
The second is to look at the composition of employees. This may be a bit extreme, but it does exist, that is, the employees of a few companies have low academic qualifications, not to mention daily and weekly newspapers, and it may be difficult to write a name. Therefore, if you do daily, weekly and monthly reports within the scope of such employees, you will not only be scolded, but also likely to be hated and even beaten. In this case, it is better to upgrade the employees who write daily, weekly and monthly reports to a higher level and let them be managers, squad leaders and section chiefs.
For example, in some companies, shop assistants do all kinds of data statistics part-time, and summarize and report the monthly, weekly and daily work progress, which better relieves the extra work pressure of employees and facilitates the workshop to master the daily work progress, killing two birds with one stone.
The third is to look at the basic conditions. Is the hardware and software facilities. It is said that the software is to formulate a unified and standardized report module, and convert the format and content of the report into a table, as long as you fill in specific numbers and concise words. When it comes to hardware, it means that the submission program is networked and electronic, and it does not need to be submitted manually, but only circulated online. Similar to the company's ERP management system, this not only standardizes the content, but also simplifies the process and reduces the workload, thus improving efficiency, reducing the difficulty of implementation and reducing the resistance of employees.
At present, information technology and artificial intelligence have begun to "fly" into the homes of ordinary people, and high-tech has had a more and more profound impact on the production, operation and human resource management of various companies. Conditional companies can completely replace daily, weekly and monthly reports with management systems and human resources systems introduced by information network companies. Although it will cost a certain amount of money, overall, the cost performance is quite high.
The fourth is to look at the actual effect. There is a saying, don't look at the advertisement, look at the curative effect. In any case, we should pay a regular and irregular "return visit" to see whether the work conforms to the original intention at that time, whether it can achieve the established effect, if not, how to improve it, whether it can be stopped and so on. Really take the actual effect as the basis to carry out this work. The only criterion for testing this work.
To sum up, nothing is absolute, whether it is good or not, it is better to take the actual effect as the standard.